Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Triptych (Frey novel)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was no consensus.  Sandstein  15:05, 24 October 2017 (UTC)

Triptych (Frey novel)

 * – ( View AfD View log  Stats )

PROMO article that has been tagged with multiple issues for 5 years, ORPHAN, SPA-created. Some minor awards and was reviewed in Publishers Weekly, but that is pretty weak, since this is a trade publication that reviews around 10,000 books per year (much of what is published). Author article, J.M. Frey, is at AfD because of similar issues. Agricola44 (talk) 21:22, 3 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Literature-related deletion discussions. Coolabahapple (talk) 00:33, 4 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Science fiction-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 15:36, 5 October 2017 (UTC)

 Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.
 * Keep Verified awards via clicking through what's already listed in the article: GNG is met, notability established via awards from The Advocate, Lambda Literary, and others.  I fail to see what the problem with the article is that can't be fixed by conscientiously editing it. Jclemens (talk) 00:09, 6 October 2017 (UTC)

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 08:40, 10 October 2017 (UTC)  Relisted to generate a more thorough discussion and clearer consensus.

Please add new comments below this notice. Thanks, North America1000 01:26, 17 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Note: This debate has been included in the list of Canada-related deletion discussions. Shawn in Montreal (talk) 19:29, 23 October 2017 (UTC)


 * Redirect to J.M. Frey; the book is not independently notable. The article is a mess of mostly WP:OR plus copy-pasted reviews, presumably from the subject's web site. One article to cover both subjects is sufficient. K.e.coffman (talk) 03:35, 24 October 2017 (UTC)
 * Keep. Sufficient coverage/notice to be included. --Michig (talk) 10:31, 24 October 2017 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.